Gord and David will Ask the Studios to Account for their Mistakes (1 Viewer)

[Katherine_K]

And I'll have to disagree with you George.

Some shows rely more on their music than others. Comparing shows like WKRP, Wonder Years, or China Beach with most shows is like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Gord Lacey]

I understand that music replacement is an issue, but it's something that isn't going to be solved easily. It involved studios and music companies getting together and finding a resonable pricing solution for the cost to license songs. I don't consider music replacement to be a sloppy release, since they have to go through and find new music, while still trying to license the songs they can.

The posting was meant to focus on syndicated episodes, or other glitches that should be more obvious to the studios (they know music is replaced, since they replaced it). I think I'm having a hard time putting my thoughts into words.

Gord

 

[Katherine_K]

Gord,

I think you are on the right track. Disclaimers are going to cause casual buyers to be more aware of what the content of their sets realy are, and if the studeos know they will have to put a disclaimer on sets they will work harder to get the uncut material.

Sometimes nothing can be done. The issue with episode 4 of Profiler season 1 comes to mind.

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

The music issue to me is a different animal. I don’t think that studios would be willing to publically out the rights holders of some of these songs. The reason being that they may have to deal with some of these same rights holders on future projects.
So, it might be harder to get the kind of information about that which would be enough to satisfy the public’s curiosity.

As for the editorial which I 100% agree with, I did have some thoughts on it. It seems and Gord/David can correct me if I’m wrong that the intent of TSoD when it was first started was to give more attention and exposure to TV Shows on DVD. This was done through a process of allowing readers to vote for what shows they’d like to see, what form they’d like to see them in as well as providing the latest in news of releases and reviews of product on the market.
However, it seems as though the focus may have to shift now to more of an advocacy site. While still providing the news, and a line of communication from consumer to studio, now it will be adding this new form of content to its readers. I of course applaud the decision as I think that there are few people that have done for TV on DVD than Gord and David. I just hope that they don’t overkill themselves with their busy schedules.
I think that TSoD has been unfairly criticized for being too nice to the studios, I mean Gord did take an active role in the Alf situation from last year among other things. I think that they appear softer to some because those people don’t understand just how important it is to keep contacts at the studio, come down too hard on someone one time, and they might not want to provide you with information in the future. So there is a balance that must be struck.
I’ve been a loyal reader of their site since I happened upon it while looking for information on the release of Season 3 of the Simpsons. I think that what Gord is going to do is the next appropriate step for the site to take, however I wish for the sake of the studios and the product released that it didn’t have to come to this. What I mean is I wish the studios were committed to getting it right in the first place. I can think of no good reason why, Roseanne, The Cosby Show, and Third Rock from the Sun used syndicated prints. I can also think of no good reason why the Third Rock cuts weren’t confirmed until after the set had hit store shelves.
Hopefully with TSoD acting as more of a watch dog, studios will take the hint that this doesn’t make their most loyal of customers happy. I again appreciate what Gord and TVShowsOnDVD.com are going to do to make these problems known.

 

[Brent_B]

Great editorial!






AMEN to this, it's exactly what I've been thinking all this time. It's also the best way to explain to someone, who doesnt keep up with the syndicated versions issue, what this all boils down to.

 

[Gord Lacey]

Casey, stop kissing ass (just kidding).

It's a very, very fine balance that has to be struck. I can't tell you how many times the studio person on the other end of the phone has been less than happy with something that was posted to the site. We rely on most of these people for the information we post, and we can't go about pissing them off, or the information dries up and we have no content. With that said, I've been a little too willing to "wait another day" for a response from them on certain issues. Instead of holding off for a response I'll be posting something to the site, then posting a response when they get their act together. Maybe this will be what they need in order to get their acts together, or maybe not.

I've always viewed the site as a bridge between the studios and the consumers; a way for information to flow back and forth. When I hear of a potential issue with a set, either before it's announced, or just after, I'm on the phone with the studio explaining the issue to them. Remember when "Lost" was announced with 6 discs, then bumped up to 7 a short time later? How about the Full Frame announcement of "Desperate Housewives"? I was on the phone about both those minutes after we posted the information to the site. Sadly "Life As We Know It" was still released in Full Frame, but I'd like to think my phone calls for the other two titles was a push in the right direction.

I'm not looking for praise, but I want people to know that we're often working behind-the-scenes to get some of this stuff corrected. Yes, we've fucked up in the past, and we'll probably do it in the future, but we're working hard to deliver the consumer's message to the studios, and the studio's message to the consumers.

This is a hobby I love, and I want to help improve the experience for everyone involved. I hope people can see the passion Dave and I have in the news we post to the site. I was in a very angry place when I wrote that news item last night, and people have already noticed (I spoke to 3 studios about it today).

Gord

 

[Randy_Cre]

While I think it's great that they are doing this, I don't think they owe an explanation to anyone for what they do or don't report on.

Well, since the companies are asking us to give them our money... I do think its fair to ask them for explanations, especially in the cases where a set as been advertised/packaged/described/promoted as "Complete", or in certain cases being full episodes not seen since their original run as was the case with the Cosby sets.

For me, a company's response can make the difference between me gritting my teeth and buying a set with syndication cuts, music replacements, etc... and not buying those sets.

To me it makes a difference if the original versions were unavailable, destroyed, damaged ... or just not provided... or syndication cuts were used as a result of indifference.

I think the responses will tell a lot about the different companies, or at least their PR abilities, some showing that they do recognize we hold the money they want... and others seeming to prefer that we just transfer our money right into their accounts, and the accounts of their shareholders, and go quietly on our way until they want more of our money.

Do the studios have to answer? Of course not.

But do I have buy more of their sets if they show a corporate arrogance and indifference? ... Of course not either.

 

[Katherine_K]

Randy,

The part of the post you were commenting on was referring to the content that TSoD reported on, not on what studeos release.

 

[Randy_Cre]

Katherine...

Ah, that didn't sound so bad then... I guess I've read enough of the "something is better than nothing... just pay up and quit complaining" attitude about altered sets. So I assumed it was meant that the studio don't owe anybody but their shareholders an explanation for what they turn out.

 

[Katherine_K]

Randy,

Often times I think you are right there are too many of those dismissals of the studeos' responsibility, but I also think that there are some hard core people around places like HTF don't really have reasonable expectations.

TV content is not film content. 18+ hours of TV can not be reasonably restored the way a 2-3 hour movie can be for the time and price tag. Sometimes music rights can not be renegociated. Sometimes the price music right holders are asking is far too much. Sometimes the original uncut episodes do not exist.

That said, I think that some studeos and some TV rights holders have relied to much on those reasonable reasons for DVD content changes to justify unreasonably sloppy releases.

 

[Jeff Willis]

says it all for me. I'm glad to see this posted on TSoD and I think it provides a balance in this issue.

Casey, I wanted to "paste" your entire post here. Your post echoes my opinion to perfection

 

[Gord Lacey]

Correct.

Here's an example I made up. If a show has $1.5 million in music to clear, and they figure they'll sell 100,000 units, then that's $15.00 per set that goes into clearing the music. Even $5/set could be a lot of money to dedicate to music, depending on the show and the budget for the set. There's a reason "Freaks & Geeks" has an SRP of $69.98; I bet $10-$15 of that price is going towards the music.

I wish I knew more about the business from the studio side. I'd love to make a "TV-DVD set simulator" that assigned a budget for a set, along with costs to clear material, license music, replicate discs, packaging, create bonus materials and pay staff. I'm sure it's extremely complicated.

Gord

 

[Will_B]

Maybe the Digital Bits can add a category to their annual Bitsy awards, which would show appreciation for well done tv-on-dvd, and they could highlight which sets couldn't even be in competition (due to their not having been done with care).

Or, scratch that. Gord, your site has annual awards too, right? You can make your own "DISQUALIFIED" list of sets. And you can make a big deal out of which sets are added to the DISQUALIFIED list each month.

 

[Malcolm R]

Taking a page from "South Park," perhaps we should have a vote as to whether the statuette should be in the shape of a Giant Douche or a Turd Sandwich.

And I agree totally about getting the fans involved. I'm totally flabbergasted that the studios continue to ignore this vast and FREE knowledge base about their own products. There are fan clubs for every show, with members who have episodes memorized front and back. All the studios would have to do would be to get a handful of these people involved to make sure things are done right and the rest of the fans would be singing the studio's praises from the highest mountain.

Talk about a missed opportunity for widespread free publicity through non-stop word-of-mouth.

 

[Gord Lacey]

I ditched the awards thing in favour of supporting the TV-DVD awards that's part of the annual conference. Who knows, I may start it up again this year.

Gord

 

[Linda Thompson]

Just start a "Hall Of Fame" for praiseworthy releases , and a "Hall Of Shame" for those which merit scorn .

 

[Dane Marvin]

Thanks for taking a stand against sloppy releases, Gord.

"ALF" and "The Cosby Show" will never be mine because many studios just don't care about what they're releasing. Seriously, each studio owes it to themselves to hire at least one super-geeky pop culture nut with too much time on their hands to tell them what they are doing wrong (David VP maybe?). And if they don't want to spend the money on him or her, your suggestion of them asking a fansite or fan forum for answers gratis is advice they should heed.

They really don't need to wait until the ball has been dropped to correct mistakes. It's a hell of a lot easier to catch the problem in the production phase than to bother with replacement discs, refunds, etc.

 

[MattHR]

By strange coincidence when coming upon this post, I had just finished a conversation with Kenneth Johnson, the creator, writer, producer and/or director of such shows as "The Bionic Woman", "The Six Million Dollar Man", "The Incredible Hulk", "Alien Nation" and "V". I had been actively pursuing him to learn whether he will be involved in any special features or commentary for Universal's upcoming SMDM and BW sets. (Afterall, he did provide two of my favorite commentaries on "Hulk"'s pilot and season two opener, which was also released by Universal)

In another coincidence, Mr. Johnson, ("Kenny" as he wished to be called), told me he recorded commentary for his pilot for "Alien Nation" on DVD today! He said the only reason he knew the DVD was in the works was because a fan, like myself, had contacted him about it. He told me Fox was embarassed to not have thought to contact him. Luckily, he was able to get to them in time to record the commentary. He offered his behind-the-scenes footage and gag reels, but apparently the budget was used up and there wasn't enough time to meet the release schedule. (We've heard that one before!)

After our initial conversation, Mr. Johnson followed up with an update that he immediately contacted Universal Home Video to "scope out the situation" regarding SMDM and BW. He said he'd let me know what he finds out. The guy is so gracious and welcoming of fans. He is exactly the kind of guy we want involved in our DVD sets! He also said he has gag reels for BW that he'd make available. Do you hear that Universal?

For fans of TV commentaries, I'd highly recommend listening to his commentaries on "Hulk" and "V". The guy has an unbelievable memory for details, and is very generous with compliments for co-workers on his sets, even pointing out extras by name and pointing out how their contributions helped the production. I'm really looking forward to hearing his commentary on "Alien Nation". The guy is a real team player and it shows, through his work and his interaction with fans. A class act all the way!
Now...I just hope and pray that I got to him, and that he gets to Universal, in time to make a difference on the SMDM and BW sets! Let's keep our fingers crossed!


Just think of how often this scenario plays out in the studio business. It seems a shame that there are so many fans that could help so much by doing so little. Everybody would win. So why aren't the studios more responsive? Most of the people in their marketing and production departments probably weren't even born, or weren't fans, of the many shows they are assigned to work on for DVD release. There have been only a few examples of DVD sets where fan, or creator, input was utilized, and the results show. Think of all the mistakes that could have been prevented. Like knowing whether the episodes are cut, proper broadcast or production order, airdates, making sure photos on the packaging are from the correct season and liner notes are accurate. Studios: think of all the money you'd save on your production budgets, since most of this work would be gladly done for free, without so much as a credit in the liner notes! (Speaking for myself, anyway).

I personally got involved when I heard that Criterion was releasing HALLOWEEN on laserdisc (back in the day), and supplied them with many of the stills for the supplement section. I was told that I was also responsible for convincing them to release it in CAV, rather than CLV, which allowed the use of the stills and text files. (To those of you I forced to shell out an extra $50: :p) )

I also got involved when I heard that a company was going to release a set of SMDM: 30th Anniversary trading cards last year. They sent me some samples of the product they had started. Bottom line: I ended up writing all the copy for two full seasons of episodes, and supplying them with a copy of an episode that Universal was missing, therefor allowing for a complete set.

So, with a little effort, differences can be made. That's one great thing about the internet: it enables many of us, through forums like this, to efficiently communicate our wishes and ideas. Now, the hard part is getting those pesky studios to listen, and let us volunteer our services!

 

[Elena S]

And someone needs to change THIS. How stupid are these recording companies (or whoever is causing the problem) not to realize the kind of publicity they're passing up by denying the use of their songs in these releases? It's like telling radio stations they can't play their songs because they want too much money for them. Wouldn't it be better for the musicians to get the exposure and create a demand for their product?

If you ask me, the ones who initiated this copyright mess have peas for brains.

 

[MatthewA]

Actually I believe it is the publishing companies who are the sticky-wickets here. And by charging a fortune for a single song, the studio will likely refuse to pay rather than call their bluff, and the publisher gets nothing for the use of the song.